The Texas Supreme Court ruled against Kate Cox, the pregnant mother who sought permission to obtain an emergency abortion, on Monday.

“These laws reflect the policy choice that the Legislature has made, and the courts must respect that choice,” the court’s seven-page ruling read. The court found that Cox’s doctor, Dr. Damla Karsan, had “asked a court to pre-authorize the abortion yet she could not, or at least did not, attest to the court that Ms. Cox’s condition poses the risks the exception requires.”

Cox, who is 20 weeks pregnant and a mother of two, had filed a lawsuit against Texas over its restrictive abortion bans. Her fetus was found to have a fatal condition known as Trisomy 18. The baby has no chance of survival, but under state law, there are only two options available to Cox: a vaginal delivery, or a C-section. Either option would risk her life or her ability to have children in the future.

Earlier on Monday, Cox’s lawyers said she was forced to flee the state to get medical care.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Holy logical fallacies, Batman!

    You’ve got a bunch of strawmen, you’ve got the hasty generalization fallacy, the slothful induction fallacy, you’ve of course got plenty ad hominems, a bunch of strawman combos such as a strawman-slippery slope combo or two, a no true Scotsman strawman and a strawman bandwagon fallacy and you’ve probably got one or two I missed as well.

    In conclusion: you’re an idiot, arguing in bad faith, or an idiot arguing in bad faith. I’d stake money on it being the latter.